Obama's 'Flexible' Second Term?

Many of us, back in 2008, instead of being inspired, were uncomfortable with the prospects of a self-admitted "blank screen" as President. One with a rather murky, largely unknown past, who voted "present" much of the time as senator. Also one who, a few years earlier, had referred to the Constitution as a "flawed" document. Then, when Obama was inaugurated, he told us he wanted to "fundamentally transform" America.Nearing the end of Obama's term, we can prepare a massive list of the questionable and unconstitutional actions, bills, regulations, appointments and orders this administration has produced, and wonder if the damage can ever be undone.

The prospect of an Obama second term is cause for even greater concern. Thomas Sowell recently remarked:

I cannot imagine what this country will be like after a second term for Obama, after he has had a chance to pack the Supreme Court with his own nominees who will rubber-stamp anything he does regardless of how much it may violate the Constitution.

Many conservative pundits argue that a poor economy will hamper Obama's reelection, while Sowell disagrees:

[Obama] knows that one of the ways to get votes is to simply create dependencies. And he's doing it all over the place and no one seems to be calling him on it.

The Heritage Foundation's recently released "dependency index" reveals a 23% increase in numbers of Americans receiving some type of government assistance during Obama's first two years in office.

While we can speculate on the economic consequences attached to an Obama reelection, what he might do on the international front in a "lame duck" second term should worry us even more.

Apparently yesterday, Russian leaders were reassured by Obama himself, in an exchange caught on microphone, unintended:

President Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it's important for him to give me space.

President Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you...

President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

Unless the actions Obama hinted at were favorable for the Russians and detrimental to his campaign, why would he have made such a remark?

Or was this simply another instance of Obama being so focused on his campaign schedule, he arrogantly implied that the Russians would have to wait until he had more time to talk?

Either way, a revealing moment.

Many of us, back in 2008, instead of being inspired, were uncomfortable with the prospects of a self-admitted "blank screen" as President. One with a rather murky, largely unknown past, who voted "present" much of the time as senator. Also one who, a few years earlier, had referred to the Constitution as a "flawed" document. Then, when Obama was inaugurated, he told us he wanted to "fundamentally transform" America.

Nearing the end of Obama's term, we can prepare a massive list of the questionable and unconstitutional actions, bills, regulations, appointments and orders this administration has produced, and wonder if the damage can ever be undone.

The prospect of an Obama second term is cause for even greater concern. Thomas Sowell recently remarked:

I cannot imagine what this country will be like after a second term for Obama, after he has had a chance to pack the Supreme Court with his own nominees who will rubber-stamp anything he does regardless of how much it may violate the Constitution.

Many conservative pundits argue that a poor economy will hamper Obama's reelection, while Sowell disagrees:

[Obama] knows that one of the ways to get votes is to simply create dependencies. And he's doing it all over the place and no one seems to be calling him on it.

The Heritage Foundation's recently released "dependency index" reveals a 23% increase in numbers of Americans receiving some type of government assistance during Obama's first two years in office.

While we can speculate on the economic consequences attached to an Obama reelection, what he might do on the international front in a "lame duck" second term should worry us even more.

Apparently yesterday, Russian leaders were reassured by Obama himself, in an exchange caught on microphone, unintended:

President Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it's important for him to give me space.

President Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you...

President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

Unless the actions Obama hinted at were favorable for the Russians and detrimental to his campaign, why would he have made such a remark?

Or was this simply another instance of Obama being so focused on his campaign schedule, he arrogantly implied that the Russians would have to wait until he had more time to talk?